<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Can&#8217;t Make it Up</title>
	<atom:link href="http://theunbrokenwindow.com/2008/02/11/cant-make-it-up/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://theunbrokenwindow.com/2008/02/11/cant-make-it-up/</link>
	<description>The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design. - F.A. Hayek</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 24 May 2012 00:10:01 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Econobran</title>
		<link>http://theunbrokenwindow.com/2008/02/11/cant-make-it-up/comment-page-1/#comment-22</link>
		<dc:creator>Econobran</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Feb 2008 02:12:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false"></guid>
		<description>http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/080204/koddities/oddity_no_serve_law

I find it interesting that the lawmaker who proposed the legislation said he never expected the bill to become law.  He simply wanted to shed some light on the obesity situation in his state.  I think there are probably more creative and less expensive ways (to taxpayers) to shed light on this problem, if he feels that strongly about it.  

As for unintended consequences, how about the Pandora&#039;s Box of subsequent legislation that could follow.  The legislation could eventually be extended to other restaurants and convenience stores.  Or, people might continue to be obese.  If people are eating healthier foods (as the legislation intends), they may consume more of it because they think it is good for them.  More calories equals more pounds.  Additionally, this could act as a regressive tax, as low income people are more likely to eat these fatty foods and would be hardest hit by the legislation.  

That&#039;s just for starters.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/080204/koddities/oddity_no_serve_law" rel="nofollow">http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/080204/koddities/oddity_no_serve_law</a></p>
<p>I find it interesting that the lawmaker who proposed the legislation said he never expected the bill to become law.  He simply wanted to shed some light on the obesity situation in his state.  I think there are probably more creative and less expensive ways (to taxpayers) to shed light on this problem, if he feels that strongly about it.  </p>
<p>As for unintended consequences, how about the Pandora&#8217;s Box of subsequent legislation that could follow.  The legislation could eventually be extended to other restaurants and convenience stores.  Or, people might continue to be obese.  If people are eating healthier foods (as the legislation intends), they may consume more of it because they think it is good for them.  More calories equals more pounds.  Additionally, this could act as a regressive tax, as low income people are more likely to eat these fatty foods and would be hardest hit by the legislation.  </p>
<p>That&#8217;s just for starters.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

